click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
.s. ambassador to the united nations, susan rice defends herself about comments about benghazi, responding directly to her harshest critics. >>> giving thanks following superstorm sandy. trying to lift the siepirits of those left with nothing. >>> plus this. >>> good morning to you. happy thanksgiving. i'm carol costello. thank you so much for spending at least part of your holiday with us. for the first time in more than a week, it has been a relatively quiet day across israel and fwa gaza. the cease fire is holding. at the border, israeli troops are packing up after spending one final night there. israeli forces says when the cease fire started, three rockets were fired into israel. two hit open areas and the third was intercepted by the iron dome missile defense system. if everything remains this relatively quiet until 2:00 eastern this afternoon, the gaza border crossings will open. rallies opened in the streets as they celebrated what they call a victory over israel. the prime minister says he's dedicated the victory to that man, ahmed al ja'abari, killed in that air strike. as you kn
controversial coming out of these briefings, whether or not susan rice, the u.n. ambassador -- the u.s. ambassador to the u.n., had the proper information or was correct in what she said publicly about the attack being probably at that point four days after the attack because of a demonstration. democrats are really to a person coming to her defense aggressively and trying to explain why there was a discrepancy. listen to kent conrad of the democratic member of the senate health care community. >> what is very clear is that ambassador rice used the talking points that the intelligence committee had all signed off on. that is very, very clear. she used the unclassified talking points that were signed off on by the entire intelligence community, so criticisms of her are completely unwarranted. that is very clear. >> and susan, dianne feinstein, just moments ago actually took out and read the unclassified talking points that susan rice used on that day, and they were very short. it sounds like there were two, maybe three points in the talking points, and it was almost certain to change.
's assessment, susan rice's assessment or your own assessment? >> i think what we first learned in the few hours and days immediately after the attack to today, the intelligence has evolved. certainly there was taking time to gather the information, to analyze it and put forward an assessment. what we do know is that when director petraeus came before us on the 14th, the information that he gave us was not the information that was put out by ambassador rice or by the administration. so it begs the question why wasn't a more complete picture given to the american public more quickly than it was? >> okay. you said that the intelligence has evolved, which means just from a layman's term, you would think that as they gathered information, they learned more than things would change. just from people sitting at home and not for partisans or for people who are on capitol hill, are you actually talk ing to each other about -- getting to the bottom of this or is everyone just talking at each other because i would imagine no administration wants anyone to die on their watch. >> certainly we are talking to
with this term that could be fed to the public. susan rice said that this was what she was cleared to use when she spoke by television a few days after the attack. >> some people are calling this a cover-up, including white house aids of covering it up, someone removed the terror link from the talking points that was initially handed out. a did that happen, and if it did happen, why? >> how in this process of removing the specific names of these extremist groups including al qaeda affiliate, a local liberal group, was there any one individual or one agency that did this? this went through an interagency process in washington 1/2. it had to be signed off by various members of the white house, members of the nfc. the only words they changed along with the state department was changing the words to diplomatic facility in the -- from the mission. and so they had nothing to do with the intelligence assessment at all. so there's still some question of exactly where in this process that the names were changed to the more generic reference to terror. >> you're not in new york city, that skyline behind
the list of those that might be nominated would be s s susan rice. she's been speaking for the first time in response to so much criticism that she has received on how she handled that attack in benghazi, libya. what more can you tell us about what she is saying and how that is resonating, jill? >> i wouldn't say, fredricka, that she really, you know, broke new ground or changed what this administration has been saying, but obama rice did say herself that with a lot of criticism coming from republicans and specifically john mccain has made some comments about her essentially saying that and that she do a maya culpa and retract what she has said or at least set it right. this controversy isn't going away, but let's listen to what ambassador rice did say. i made clear that it was preliminary, and that our investigation would give us the definitive answers. everyone, particularly the intelligence community, has worked in good faith to provide the best assessment based on the information available. >> it doesn't appear that this will go away. that probably won't end it. as we know, there have
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)